Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 51(1)(d), 51(1)(e), 51(3), 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e), 106(3)(c), 224(6)

Law: Elections Act, 2017

Section: 66,67,104

Law: Elections Rules, 2017

Section: 33

(a) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e), 106(3)(c) & 63---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), Ss. 66, 104 & 215(5)---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---Eligible political parties--Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") [a political party] denied its election symbol by the Election Commission of Pakistan for failing to conduct its intra-party election--Whether Sunni Ittehad Council ("SIC") [a political party] which was joined by 80 independent returned candidates, who were backed by PTI, was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Whether Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Reasons for disagreeing with the majority decision in the present case listed.
i.    Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was not before the Supreme Court nor before
the High Court nor even before the ECP;
ii.    The joining of 80 independent returned candidates with Sunni Ittehad Council
("SIC") was never disputed by anyone;
iii.    The said 39 plus 41 persons as mentioned in the majority's short order did not come before the Supreme Court nor were they heard. The majority short order decided about their rights or lack thereof without their consent or even hearing them. Their joining of SIC has been undone without such prayer raised by anyone before the Supreme Court, or before the High Court;
iv.    Not only the appeals filed by the SIC have been dismissed by the majority order, as no relief has been granted to SIC but independent members who joined the SIC have also been snatched from the SIC and that too without hearing the above said 39 plus 41 persons;
v.    Unless Articles 51, 106 and 63 of Constitution are suspended and in their place new articles in consonance with the relief granted through the majority order are inserted in the Constitution, the relief which has been granted to the PTI cannot be granted; vi. Article 175 of the Constitution has been ignored;
vii.    The constitutional limits of jurisdiction under Article 185 of the Constitution
have been ignored;
viii.    All substantive as well as procedural law with regard to parties to lis have
been ignored;
ix.    The relief granted to PTI is self-created and has been carved out by the
majority, without anyone claiming this relief in these proceedings;
x.    Not only SIC has been denied relief claimed by it but all those who have joined it have been taken off and for the rest of the tenure of the National as well as Provincial assemblies. Thus, SIC has been kicked out from the assemblies;
xi.    For a specific date i.e. 06.05.2024 the notification of returned candidates for special seats has been quashed, however before that date their notification and acts are held to be valid. It is incomprehensible how can this be done, as it is without any backing of Constitution;
xii.    The majority short judgment virtually declares that said 80 persons are not
honest and ameen in accordance with Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution;
xiii.    All the returned candidates for the reserved seats of other parties who have
been notified were not issued notices and provided an opportunity of hearing;
xiv.    Forty-one (41) candidates mentioned in Annexure-B (of the majority short
judgment) have been given the choice of joining any other Political Party;
xv.    The issue was simply the matter of post general elections directly related to the reserved seats for both women and non-Muslims on the basis of proportional representation system of political parties' lists of candidates under Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution. The majority's short order in effect created a new parliamentary party in the National Assembly and three Provincial Assemblies and since this related to the pre-election process, it is clearly and unequivocally not an issue before the Supreme Court. In the process of the general elections all events are scheduled and timebound and the same cannot be reversed;
xvi.    The judgment of the full Bench of the Peshawar High Court has been set aside by the majority's short order to the extent, that it is or may be inconsistent with the majority's short order. This is incomprehensible as none of the rights which have now been created in favour of PTI by the majority's short order were in issue before the High Court,
nor had been adjudicated upon. The High Court had simply dismissed SIC's claim
to the reserved seats, which was the lis before the High Court.
If an independent candidate joins a party, though it may be listed as a political party with ECP, it does not make that party entitled for the reserved seats. The joining of independent candidates only enhances the proportion of right in the reserved seats of that party if that party has won seats. Joining of independent candidates with any political party does not create a right in favour of that political party to become eligible for reserved seats only on the basis of the joining of independent candidates.
The majority judgment ignores all rules of procedure, substantive provisions of law and the Constitution. Relief cannot be granted to the PTI as PTI was not before the Court nor tried to become a party before the ECP, High Court and before the Supreme Court nor was claiming the reserved seats, which were in issue in the instant litigation. If the said 39 plus 41 persons take any step on the basis of majority's short judgment, which is not in accordance with the Constitution, they may lose their seats as returned candidates on the basis of violation of the Constitution. Any other constitutional body cannot be asked to take any steps or decisions which are not permissible under the Constitution. If the said 80 persons change their stance on the basis of the majority short judgment, they will be guilty of violating their oath for the members of the National Assembly.
For creating and carving out relief in these proceedings for PTI, the Court would have to travel beyond the jurisdiction conferred by Articles 175 and 185 of the Constitution and would also have to suspend Articles 51, 106 and 63 of the Constitution and section 104 of the Elections Act, 2017 along with the relevant rules. All the rules of procedures of proceedings before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 would also have to be ignored as no party before the Court asked in writing or orally for the relief which has been granted to PTI. Therefore, any affidavit contrary to the provisions of the affidavits already filed will entail the penal consequences of non-seating such members of National Assembly and Provincial Assemblies if he/she files a fresh affidavit in contradiction to his/her previous affidavit and joins any other party. Any order of the Court which is not in consonance with the constitutional provisions is not binding upon any other constitutional organ of the State. In conclusion, it is clear that the superstructure created by
the majority's short order, does not in any way come within the ambit of the
jurisdiction vested in the Supreme Court or in the Constitution.
Per Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, J; Munib Akhtar, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha A. Malik, Athar Minallah, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ. agreeing; Qazi Faez Isa, CJ., Yahya Afridi, Amin-ud-Din Khan, Jamal
Khan Mandokhail and Naeem Akhtar Afghan, JJ. dissenting. [Majority view]
(b) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 218 & 187(1)---Election Commission of Pakistan, duty of---Scope--Electoral justice and integrity---Power of the Supreme Court to do complete justice for protection of democracy---Election authorities, as "electoral management bodies", are the "guarantor institutions" of democratic processes and are critical to democratic governance, akin to a "fourth branch of government"---Their constitutional role is to ensure the conduct of elections by providing an equal and fair competitive field for all political entities and protect citizens' rights to vote--As an impartial steward of the electoral process, the Election Commission of Pakistan is not only an administrative body but also a guardian of electoral integrity and democracy's legitimacy---When election authorities engage in actions that undermine these principles, such as unlawfully denying the recognition of a major political party and treating its nominated candidates as independents, they not only compromise the rights of these candidates but also significantly infringe upon the rights of the electorate and corrode their own institutional legitimacy---When the Election Commission errs or makes significant mistakes impacting the electoral process, judicial intervention becomes necessary to rectify them and ensure electoral justice---Electoral justice is vital to protecting political and electoral rights and is intertwined with electoral integrity---Role of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in overseeing electoral integrity is crucial for sustaining public trust in the democratic process, and the Court's power to do "complete justice" is a critical tool in the constitutional arsenal of the Supreme Court, enabling it to prevent democratic backsliding, and protect democracy effectively with a focus on the electorate's rights--Denying electoral justice and compromising electoral integrity would undermine the very legitimacy of democracy.
Tom Ginsburg, 'Democracy Backsliding and the Rule of Law' 44 Ohio University Law Review 351 (2018) ref.
(c) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 185---Appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court---Election dispute--Judicial inquiry not limited to pleadings of the parties---A case before the Supreme Court involving an election dispute cannot be treated as an ordinary civil case and the judicial inquiry into such a case cannot be limited to the pleadings of the parties.
Elections are a crucial part of the democratic process, and the public has a major stake in ensuring that they are held free and fair, unmarred by corrupt or illegal practices. Therefore, unlike ordinary civil cases, election cases involve substantial public interest. An election dispute is fundamentally different from other civil disputes, as it is not solely a dispute between two contesting parties but a proceeding where the constituency itself is the principal interested party. These cases involve not just the rights of the contesting candidates or political parties but also the rights of the voters, constituencies and the public. Election cases aim to fill public offices by properly qualified and duly elected candidates and to maintain the purity of elections, ensuring that no one takes charge of a public office through flagrant breaches of election laws or corrupt practices. The proceedings in election cases thus have unique characteristics because they serve the interests of the entire constituency, differentiating them from ordinary civil proceedings. This distinction clearly demonstrates the flaw in treating an election case as an ordinary civil case and limiting the judicial inquiry to the pleadings of the parties as it is in adversarial proceedings.
Morton v. Galway [1875] 3 O.M. & H. 19; Aldridge v. Hurst [1876] L.R. 1 C.P. 410; Sreenivasan v. Election Tribunal [1955] 11 E.L.R. 278; Inamati Basappa v.
Desai Ayyappa AIR 1958 SC 698; Mohinder Singh v. Chief Election Commissioner AIR 1978 SC 851; Dilshad Khan v. Arshad Ali 1999 MLD 2874 and Irshad Hussain v. Ashraf Nagra 2003 YLR 812 ref.
In adjudicating election controversies, courts must therefore play an active role in an inquisitorial manner, defending the rights of the constituency and the values and principles of democracy. They must act as guardians of the fundamental rights of the people against any misuse of power or illegal action in the electoral process.
(d) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Part II, Chap. 1---Fundamental Rights---Progressive, and dynamic interpretation---Fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution, an organic instrument, are not capable of precise or permanent definition delineating their meaning and scope for all times to come---With the passage of time, changes occur in the political, social and economic conditions of the society, which requires reevaluation of their meaning and scope in consonance with the changed conditions--Therefore, keeping in view the prevailing socioeconomic and politico-cultural values and ideals of the society, the courts construe the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution with a progressive, liberal and dynamic approach--This approach ensures that the fundamental rights remain a vibrant and effective guarantee of citizens' rights, liberties and freedoms, adapting to the evolving needs and aspirations of society---With this approach, the courts expound the fundamental rights to give them life and substance that are true to the reality of the changing times.
Nawaz Sharif v. President of Pakistan PLD 1993 SC 473 ref.
(e) Interpretation of statutes---
----Provision entailing penal consequences---Strict construction---It is a cardinal principle of the construction of statutes that any provision entailing penal consequence, whether of criminal law or of civil law, must be construed strictly--This principle of strict construction of penal statutes is also called the principle against doubtful penalisation---It stresses that a person should not be penalised except under clear law and if, in construing the relevant provisions, there appears any reasonable doubt or ambiguity, it should be resolved in favour of the person who would be liable to the penalty---No penalty or penal consequence can be added to the one specified in law by inference or assumption---Penal actions can only be taken on the basis of express and clear provisions of law.
Muhammad Ali v. State Bank of Pakistan 1973 SCMR 140; F. B. Ali v. State PLD 1975 SC 506; M.B. Abbasi v. State 2009 SCMR 808; Zahid Rehman v. State PLD 2015 SC 77; Tahir Naqash v. State PLD 2022 SC 385; PIA Corporation v. Labour Court PLD 1978 SC 239; Federal Land Commission v. Ghulam Qadir 1983 SCMR 867; Siddique Khan v. Abdul Shakur PLD 1984 SC 289; UBL v. Yousuf Dhadhi 1988 SCMR 82; Wukala Mahaz v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1998 SC 1263; B.I.S.E. v. Rizwan Rashid 2005 SCMR 728; Tahir Hussain v. Liaqat Ali 2014 SCMR 637; State Bank of Pakistan v. S.E.C.P. PLD 2018 SC 52; Maxwell on the Interpretation of Statutes (12th ed.) pp. 238-240 and Bennion on Statutory Interpretation (7th ed.) pp. 715-717 ref.
(f) Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017)---
----Ss. 215(5), 209 & 210---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 17(2)---Political party--Failure to conduct intra-party elections---Non-allocation of election symbol---No further penalty beyond the specified non-allocation of an election symbol---It is unequivocal that Section 215(5) of the Elections Act, 2017 prescribes a penal consequence for a political party's failure to comply with the provisions of Section 209 (regarding intra-party elections) or Section 210 (regarding the sources of the party's funds)---The specified penalty of non-allocation of an election symbol curtails the political party's fundamental right to function and operate as a political party-a right implicit in the right to form a political party guaranteed by Article 17(2) of the Constitution---Therefore, Section 215(5) must be construed strictly -No further penalty or consequence beyond the specified non-allocation of an election symbol can be inferred or assumed from Section 215(5)---Additionally, no other constitutional or statutory right of the political party can be denied on the basis of the non-allocation of an election symbol under this provision. (g) Election Rules, 2017---
----R. 94, Explanation---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), S. 215(5)---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Explanation to Rule 94 of the Election Rules, 2017, vires of---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---Eligible political parties---Explanation to Rule 94 of the Election Rules, 2017 being beyond the scope of Section 215(5) of the Elections Act, 2017 and inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) and 106(3)(c) of the Constitution, was ultra vires the Elections Act, 2017 and the Constitution, thus void and invalid.
Rule 94 of the Election Rules, 2017 provides the procedure for the calculation, allocation and notification of the share of proportional representation of political parties in the seats reserved for women and non-Muslims. Its Explanation stipulates that '[f]or the purpose of this rule, the expression "political party" means a political party to which a symbol has been allocated by the Commission.' By defining a political party in this manner, the Explanation excludes a political party that has not been allotted a symbol by the Commission from being allocated a share of proportional representation in the reserved seats. No such exclusion of a political party, as created by the Explanation to Rule 94, is provided in Articles 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) and 106(3)(c) of the Constitution, nor is any such consequence of nonallocation of the election symbol provided in Section 215(5) of the Elections Act, 2017 or any other provision of the said Act. In effect, it has introduced an additional penal consequence of declaring a political party ineligible to obtain an election symbol under Section 215(5) of the Elections Act, 2017 and it has also infringed the constitutional right of a political party, conferred by Articles 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) and 106(3)(c) of the Constitution, to have its due share of proportional representation in the seats reserved for women and non-Muslims on the basis of general seats secured by such a political party. This Explanation has thus clearly gone beyond and against the provisions of the Elections Act, 2017 and the Constitution.
The Explanation to Rule 94 of the Election Rules, 2017 being beyond the scope of Section 215(5) of the Elections Act, 2017 and inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) and 106(3)(c) of the Constitution, is declared ultra vires the Elections Act, 2017 and the Constitution, thus void and invalid.
(h) Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017)---
----Ss. 215(5), 98 & 67(3)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 17(2)---Whether a candidate nominated by a political party ineligible to obtain an election symbol be mentioned as an independent candidate in the list of contesting candidates (Form33), and can such a returned candidate be notified as an independent returned candidate in the Section 98 Notification?---Right to participate in and contest elections as a political party through its nominated candidates is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 17(2) of the Constitution---This right is not, nor can it be, extinguished by any provision of the Elections Act, 2017 including Section 215(5) thereof---Depriving a political party of participating in and contesting elections through its nominated candidates, destroys the political existence of the party and is tantamount to its political extermination and virtual dissolution, which cannot be done except by the procedure and on the grounds provided in Article 17(2) of the Constitution---Similar would be the position if the candidates nominated by a political party are denied the status of being the candidates of that political party and are mentioned as independent candidates in the list of contesting candidates (Form-33), or such returned candidates are notified as independent returned candidates in the Notification under section 98 of the Elections Act, 2017--Such actions of the Returning Officers and the Election Commission of Pakistan would also be ultra vires Article 17(2) of the Constitution, as they effectively nullify the party's right to participate in and contest elections---Notwithstanding that a political party has been declared ineligible to obtain an election symbol, its nominated candidates cannot be mentioned as independent candidates in the list of contesting candidates (Form 33), despite allotment of different election symbols to them under Section 67(3) of the Elections Act, 2017 nor can they be notified as independent returned candidates in the Section-98 Notification.
Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1988 SC 416; Benazir Bhutto v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1989 SC 66 and Nawaz Sharif v. President of Pakistan PLD 1993 SC 473 ref.
(i) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d) & 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Seats reserved for women and nonMuslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of--Eligible political parties---Parties that contest and win general seats---Article 51(6) (d) of the Constitution refers to political parties that have contested for and won one or more general seats in the National Assembly from the Province concerned, and not to all enlisted political parties---Similarly, Article 51(6)(e) of the Constitution refers to political parties that have contested for and won one or more general seats in the National Assembly from the whole country, i.e., from any of the Provinces or the Federal Capital---Therefore, Articles 51(6)(d) & (e) and 106(3)(c) of the Constitution refer to political parties that have contested for and won general seats and not to all enlisted political parties---Political party which does not win (any) general seats, is not entitled to allocation of the reserved seats.
(j) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts.51(6)(d), proviso, 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---Independent candidates---Only political parties, not independent returned candidates, are entitled to the allocation of the reserved seats---Independent returned candidates can only be counted towards the proportional representation (of political parties) if they act in accordance with the proviso to Article 51(6)(d) of the Constitution and join a political party, in which case their seats shall be counted as the seats of the political parties to which they join for the purpose of determining the proportional representation of political parties---For the purpose of allocating reserved seats under Articles 51(6)(d) & 51(6)(e) of the Constitution, the proportional representation of political parties is to be calculated on the basis of total number of general seats won by each political party, including the seats of independent returned candidates who join it, but excluding the seats of other independent returned candidates.
(k) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Election Rules, 2017, R.95(2)---Rule 95(2) of the Elections Rules, 2017, vires of---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---No reserved seat should ordinarily be left vacant---Adopting an interpretation of paragraphs (d) and (e) of Article 51(6) of the Constitution that would result in holding certain reserved seats vacant would lead to a form of disenfranchisement, where the electorate's mandate is not fully realised in terms of gender and minority representation, and thus frustrate the constitutional objective of providing for such reserved seats---Rule 95(2) of the Elections Rules, 2017 which provides that the seats won by independent candidates, other than those who join a political party, shall be excluded for the purpose of determining the share of each political party, is thus found consistent with the constitutional provisions, as it ensures the constitutional objective that no reserved seat should ordinarily remain vacant.
(l) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 17(2), 19, 51(6)(d) & 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies---Right of a political party to reserved seats proportionate to the general seats won---Scope--Right to so many of the reserved seats that are proportionate to the general seats won by a political party is an integral part of the right to form a political party, as this right also gives the "life and substance" to the said fundamental right--Therefore, denial of the right to reserved seats proportionate to the general seats won by it would violate the fundamental rights of a political party guaranteed by Article 17(2) of the Constitution as well as the fundamental right to vote of the electorate that have voted for such political party guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution.
(m) Administration of justice---
----Wrongful acts/omissions of public functionaries---No person should be made to suffer or be prejudiced by an unlawful act or omission of public functionaries---If any person suffers the loss of any right or benefit because of an unlawful act or omission of a public functionary, he is entitled, by reason of an obligation of justice, to be restored to that right or benefit and put in the same position, insofar as is possible, as he would have been if such unlawful act or omission had not been made by the public functionary.
(n) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 187(1)---Power of the Supreme Court to do complete justice---Scope--General power of the Supreme Court under Article 187(1) of the Constitution is to be invoked and exercised by the Court to do complete justice in any case when there is no specific provision of law that covers or addresses the matter or issue involved---Power under Article 187(1) of the Constitution is focused on achieving and prioritizing fairness to ensure complete justice in any case---While doing complete justice in the exercise of its general power under Article 187(1) of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is not handicapped by any technicality or rule of practice or procedure, nor is the exercise of this power by the Court dependent on an application by a party.
Dossani Travels v. Travels Shop PLD 2014 SC 1; Saddaqat Khan v. Collector Land Acquisition PLD 2010 SC 878; Martin Dow Marker Ltd. v. Asadullah Khan 2020 SCMR 2147 and State v. Alif Rehman 2021 SCMR 503 ref.
(o) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 17(2), 19, 51(6)(d) & 51(6)(e)---Seats reserved for women and nonMuslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies---Case before the Supreme Court regarding dispute over allocation of reserved seats---Candidate for the seat reserved for women in the National Assembly---Not a necessary party to the case---A contesting candidate or a returned candidate to the seats reserved for women or non-Muslims is not a necessary party to a dispute where the matter to be decided is which political party and in what proportion is entitled to the reserved seats---Persons nominated by a political party for reserved seats or elected to such seats do not have a personal right to such seats---It is the right of the electorate guaranteed under Articles 17(2) and 19 of the Constitution, exercisable through political parties, to have proportional representation in the reserved seats, not of the person nominated for or elected to such seats.
(p) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), Ss. 66, 98, 104 & 215(5)---Election Rules, 2017, R. 94, Explanation---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---Eligible political parties---Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") [a political party] denied its election symbol by the Election Commission of Pakistan for failing to conduct its intra-party election---Whether Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI")was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Held, that lack or denial of an election symbol does not in any manner affect the constitutional and legal rights of a political party to participate in an election---Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was and is a political party, which secured or won general seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies in the General Elections of 2024---Directions issued by the Supreme Court regarding the procedure and methodology for allocation of reserved seats for women and minorities to PTI in the National and Provincial Assemblies stated.
(i)    The lack or denial of an election symbol does not in any manner affect the constitutional and legal rights of a political party to participate in an election (whether general or bye) and to field candidates and the Election Commission of Pakistan ("Commission') is under a constitutional duty to act, and construe and apply all statutory provisions, accordingly.
(ii)    For the purposes, and within the meaning, of paragraphs (d) and (e) of clause (6) of Article 51 ("Article 51 Provisions") and paragraph (c) of clause (3) of Article 106 ("Article 106 Provisions") of the Constitution, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was and is a political party, which secured or won (the two terms being interchangeable) general seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies in the General Elections of 2024 as herein after provided.
(iii)    During the course of the hearing of the instant appeals, counsel for the Commission placed before the Court a list ("the List") of 80 returned candidates for the National Assembly (now MNAs), setting out in tabular form particulars relating to their election. Counsel made a categorical statement that the Commission stood by the data so provided to the Court. In particular, the List contained three columns marked as follows: (i) "Statement (on nomination form) given in declaration and oath by the person nominated (i.e., 'I belong to')"; (ii) "Certificate of party affiliation under Section 66 of the Elections Act, 2017"; and (iii) "Statutory Declaration/affidavit accompanying section 66 certificate". In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the General Election of 2024, it is declared that out of the aforesaid 80 returned candidates (now MNAs) those (being 39 in all and whose particulars are set out in Annex A to this Order) in respect of whom the Commission has shown "PTI" in any one of the aforesaid columns in the List, were and are the returned candidates whose seats were and have been secured by the PTIwithin the meaning, and for purposes of, para (ii) above in relation to the Article 51 Provisions.
(iv)    In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the General Election of 2024, it is further ordered that any of the remaining 41 returned candidates out of the aforesaid 80 (whose particulars are set out in Annex B to this Order) may, within 15 working days of this Order file a statement duly signed and notarized stating that he or she contested the General Election as a candidate of the political party specified therein. If any such statement(s) is/are filed, the Commission shall forthwith but in any case within 7 days thereafter give notice to the political party concerned to file, within 15 working days, a confirmation that the candidate contested the General Election as its candidate. A political party may in any case, at any time after the filing of a statement asaforesaid, of its own motion file its confirmation. If such a statement is filed, and is confirmed by the political party concerned, then the seat secured by such candidate shall be forthwith deemed to be a seat secured by that political party for the purposes of para (ii) above in relation to the Article 51 Provisions. The Commission shall also forthwith issue, and post on its website, a list of the retuned candidates (now MNAs) and seats to which this para applies within 7 days after the last date on which a political party may file its confirmation and shall simultaneously file a compliance report in the Court.
(v)    For the purposes of para (ii) of this Order in relation to the Article 51 Provisions, the number of general seats secured by PTI shall be the total of the seats declared in terms of para (iii) and those, if any, to which para (iv)applies. The PTI shall be entitled to reserved seats for women and minorities in the National Assembly accordingly. PTI shall, within 15working days of this Order file its lists of candidates for the said reserved seats and the provisions of the Elections Act, 2017 ("Act") (including in particular S. 104) and the Elections Rules, 2017 ("Rules") shall be applied to such lists in such manner as gives effect to this Order in full measure. The Commission shall, out of the reserved seats for women and minorities in the National Assembly to which para (vii) of this Order applies, notify as elected in terms of the Article 51 Provisions, that number of candidates from the lists filed (or, as the case may be, to be filed) by the PTI as is proportionate to the general seats secured by it in terms of paras (iii) and (iv) of this Order.
(vi)    The order of the Election Commission of Pakistan ("Commission") dated 01.03.2024 ("Impugned Order") is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution, without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
(vii)    The notifications (of various dates) whereby the persons respectively mentioned therein (being the persons identified in the Election Commission's notification No.F.5(1)/2024-Cord. dated 13.05.2024) have been declared to be returned candidates for reserved seats for women and minorities in the National and Provincial Assemblies are declared to be ultra vires the Constitution, without lawful authority and of no legal effect, and are quashed from 06.05.2024 onwards, being the date an interim order was made by the Court.
(viii)    The foregoing paras shall apply mutatis mutandis for purposes of the Article 106 Provisions in relation to PTI (as set out in para (ii) herein above) for the reserved seats for women and minorities in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Punjab and Sindh Provincial Assemblies to which para (vii) of this Order applies. In case the Commission or PTI need any clarification or order so as to give effect to this para in full measure, it shall forthwith apply to the Court by making an appropriate application, which shall be put up before the Judges constituting the majority in chambers for such orders and directions as may be deemed appropriate.
Per Yahya Afridi, J. [Minority view] (q) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), Ss. 66, 104 & 215(5)---Election Rules, 2017, R. 92---Seats reserved for women and nonMuslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of--Eligible political parties---Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") [a political party] denied its election symbol by the Election Commission of Pakistan for failing to conduct its intra-party election---Whether Sunni Ittehad Council ("SIC") [a political party] which was joined by 80 independent returned candidates, who were backed by PTI, was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Whether Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Sunni Ittehad Council does not fulfil the conditions prescribed for a political party under the enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law to be allowed/allocated reserved seats for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly or the Provincial Assemblies---However, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") did fulfil the conditions prescribed for a political party under the enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law to be allowed/allocated reserved seats for women and nonMuslims---Procedure and methodology for allocation of reserved seats for women and minorities to PTI in the National and Provincial Assemblies stated.
A fundamental prerequisite for a political party to qualify for reserved seats is the winning of at least one general seat in the elections. Consequently, the entitlement of a political party to reserved seats is inextricably linked to its success on at least one general seat. Similarly, a political party must win a general seat to benefit from the inclusion of independent candidates, so as to become a part of its numerical strength for the purpose of allocation of reserved seats.
Sunni Ittehad Council ("SIC") is a registered political party, but it did not field any candidate for a seat in the National Assembly or Provincial Assemblies in the General Election, 2024. Thus, having won no seat in the houses, it cannot seek to include the independent returned members of the respective houses to enhance its strength for the allocation of reserved seats within the contemplation of Articles 51 and 106 of the Constitution. Further, SIC had not submitted any list of candidates for reserved seats for women or for non-Muslims within the period fixed by Election Commission of Pakistan ('ECP'), as reflected in the Schedule of Election notified in the official gazette. SIC does not fulfil the conditions prescribed for a political party under the enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law to be allocated reserved seats for women and non- Muslims in the National Assembly and Provincial Assemblies.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") fulfils the conditions prescribed for a political party under the enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law to be allowed/allocated reserved seats for women and non-Muslims, in terms that:
i. A candidate for a seat in the National Assembly or the Provincial Assembly, who in his/her nomination paper has declared on oath to belong to Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") and duly submitted a certificate of the same political party confirming that he/she is the nominated candidate of PTI for the respective constituency, shall remain so, and cannot be declared independent, unless he/she submitted a written declaration to the Election Commission of Pakistan or Returning Officer to be treated as the candidate of another political party or as an independent candidate; ii. A returned candidate to the National Assembly or the Provincial Assembly, who in his/her nomination paper has declared on oath to belong to PTI and duly submitted a certificate of the same political party confirming that he/she is the nominated candidate of PTI for the respective constituency, shall remain so, and this consistent position maintained by a returned candidate throughout the electoral process should be legally recognized by the Election Commission of Pakistan and such returned candidate cannot be treated as the returned candidate of another political party or as an independent returned candidate, and thus, the reserved seats for women and non- Muslims are to be allowed/ allocated to PTI, accordingly; iii. A candidate nominated by PTI for a constituency of the National Assembly or the Provincial Assembly who, after being declared returned, joined another political party or sought to be treated as independent, raises serious concerns about disregarding the trust reposed in him/her by the voters, thus undermining the will of the people; and iv. The legal implications, effects and consequences of the determinations made above in paragraphs (ii) and (iii), as well as the actions or inactions of the Election Commission of Pakistan thereon, although deeply concerning, have not been challenged in the present appeals and petitions; and the persons who would be affected or aggrieved are not parties before the Supreme Court. Therefore, issuing definitive directions to the Election Commission of Pakistan qua the allocation of specific number of reserved seats for women and non-Muslims to a political party in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies would not be legally appropriate.
Accordingly, the Election Commission of Pakistan is directed to decide the allocation of reserved seats for women and non- Muslims to political parties in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies in the light of the determinations made hereinabove after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, and if required revisit its earlier decisions on the matter.
(r) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 187(1)---Power of the Supreme Court to do complete justice---Scope--While the undeniable power of the Supreme Court to do complete justice under Article 187 of the Constitution is recognized, exercising this power in the absence of an aggrieved party directly approaching the Court could set a dangerous and farreaching precedent---Such a course risks undermining the principles of due process and judicial restraint, potentially leading to an overreach of judicial authority--Exercise of this power must, therefore, be reserved for exceptional circumstances, where there is a clear and compelling need to intervene to bolster the rights of the aggrieved petitioner, and prevent a miscarriage of justice.
Per Jamal Khan Mandokhail, J; Qazi Faez Isa, CJ. agreeing [Minority view]:
(s) Interpretation of Constitution---
----Supreme Court can interpret the Constitution, but it must ensure that words are not read into it nor should it ascribe artificial meaning to commonly understood words---Court must ensure that words are not read into the Constitution and no artificial meaning is to be ascribed to commonly understood words.
(t) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e) & 106(3)(c)---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), Ss. 66, 67, 104 & 215(5)---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---Eligible political parties--Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") [a political party] denied its election symbol by the Election Commission of Pakistan for failing to conduct its intra-party election--Whether Sunni Ittehad Council ("SIC") [a political party] which was joined by 80 independent returned candidates, who were backed by PTI, was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Whether Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Held, that Sunni Ittehad Council ("SIC") did not contest the General Elections of the year 2024, but demands allocation of reserved seats on account of inclusion of independent parliamentarians in it---SIC did not secure a single seat in the National Assembly or any of the Provincial Assemblies nor submitted a list of its candidates for seats reserved for women and non-Muslims---Thus, it is not entitled to any of the reserved seats in the National Assembly and in the Provincial Assemblies---Impugned judgment and the order dated 1 March 2024 of the Election Commission of Pakistan ("ECP") to such extent is upheld---Non-allocation of symbol to a political party, in no way prevents a candidate from filing a declaration about his affiliation with that political party, nor does it prevent such political party from nominating a candidate to contest an election---Impugned judgment of the High Court and the order of the ECP to the extent of the proportional representation distribution of seats amongst the political parties which won and secured seats is also maintained, however, since the ECPcalculated and allocated the seats to the parties by the exclusion of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") candidates, therefore, to such extent, the impugned judgment of the High Court and the order of the ECP are set aside---A number of candidates had submitted their nomination papers declaring on oath that they belonged to PTI supported by an affiliation certificate of the said party, though some did not submit affiliation certificates of PTI, however, since they stated on oath that they belonged to PTI, and did not contradict themselves, they should be considered to be members of PTI in the National and the Provincial Assemblies--ECP by misinterpreting a judgment of the Supreme Court dated 13 January 2024, which was regarding non-holding intra-party elections in PTI, wrongly mentioned the said candidates of the PTI as independents in Form 33 of the Election Rules--ECP had no authority to declare validly nominated candidates of a political party to be independent candidates---Similarly, a candidate who once declares himself/herself as a candidate of a political party, can not subsequently resile from his/her candidature of a particular party, after the last date of withdrawal of the nomination papers---Neither the PTI nor any candidate affiliated with PTI approached either the Supreme Court before or during the hearing of these proceedings, or the High Court to challenge the decision of the ECP, declaring them as independents---However, in view of the fact that the appeal and the petition are a continuation of election proceedings before the ECP, the Supreme Court can look into the vires of the decision of the ECP in the light of the provisions of Article 51(1)(d) and (e) of the Constitution read with sections 66, 67 and 104 of the Elections Act, 2017 to safeguard the interest of women and non-Muslims---As a consequence whereof, the candidates who had submitted their nomination papers declaring that they belonged to PTI and had not filed a document showing affiliation with another political party before the last date of withdrawal of the nomination papers, should have been treated as the Parliamentary Party of PTI, but the needful was not done by the ECP---Consequently, the PTI as a Parliamentary Party is entitled to the reserved seats---ECP should recalculate and reallocate the reserved seats amongst the political parties, including the PTI, as provided by Article 51(6)(d) and (e) of the Constitution---Candidates who had submitted their nomination papers by 24 December 2023, which was the last date of submission of nomination papers, and had declared them selves either as independent candidates or had left blank the relevant column in the nomination papers/declaration and were elected shall be considered to be independents---All those who joined the SIC are presumed to have done so out of their own free will---None of them claimed to have joined SIC because of any misunderstanding of any judgment, the law, compulsion, coercion or undue influence and it is not for the Supreme Court to presume otherwise---They are now members of SIC---Neither the Constitution nor the Elections Act, 2017 permits the Supreme Court to issue direction or provide an opportunity or additional avenue to them to join another political party and that too, within a period of fifteen days.
(u) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(3), 51(6)(d) & (e), 106(3)(c) & 224(6)---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies---Whether reserved seats could be left vacant---Held, that under Article 51(3) of the Constitution, the total number of seats in the National Assembly shall be 326, out of which 60 seats are reserved for women and 10 seats for non-Muslims---Such right of women and non-Muslims has been guaranteed by the Constitution---They shall be elected in accordance with the law through proportional representation system of political parties' list of candidates on the basis of total number of general seats secured by each political party from the Province concerned in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, as provided by Article 51(6) (d) and (e) of the Constitution---Therefore, they cannot be deprived of this right of theirs by leaving these seats vacant, and all reserved seats must be filled in, as provided by Article 224(6) of the Constitution.
Per Qazi Faez Isa, CJ.;agreeing with Jamal Khan Mandokhail, J. [Minority view]:
(v) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Arts. 51(6)(d), 51(6)(e), 106(3)(c) & 10A---Elections Act (XXXIII of 2017), Ss. 66, 104 & 215(5)---Seats reserved for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies, allocation of---Eligible political parties--Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") [a political party] denied its election symbol by the Election Commission of Pakistan for failing to conduct its intra-party election--Whether Sunni Ittehad Council ("SIC") [a political party] which was joined by 80 independent returned candidates, who were backed by PTI, was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Whether Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") was eligible for the allocation of reserved seats---Constitutional violations and illegalities in the majority's short order of 12 July 2024, the majority's detailed judgment of 23 September 2024, the order/clarification of 14 September 2024 and the clarification of 18 October 2024 highlighted.
Present appeals were heard by a thirteen-member Bench of the Supreme Court, comprising of all judges of the Supreme Court. The majority's short order concluded by permitting the Election Commission of Pakistan ('ECP') and Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf ('PTI') to, 'apply to the Court by making an appropriate application, which shall be put up before the Judges constituting the majority in chambers for such orders and directions as may be deemed appropriate'. This deviated from how courts have always functioned, was novel and unprecedented.
The majority of eight judges decided to part ways with the Court, comprising of thirteen judges, which had heard the appeals. The majority set up its own virtual court, permitted the making of 'an appropriate application' by the ECP and PTI, and directed that such appropriate application would only be heard by them whilst cloistered in Chambers. In doing this the majority of the Judges effectively legislated, because neither the Constitution nor any law permits what they did. Incidentally no party or counsel during the hearing ever suggested the course of action which the majority adopted, and neither the majority's short order nor the majority's detailed judgment offers an explanation to justify it.
The majority disregarded the precedents of the Supreme Court, and they not only carved out a separate eight-member 'court' from the thirteen-member Court, but also innovated further by not finally concluding the hearing of the appeals, because they permitted appropriate application to be filed, introduced timelines and changed what the Constitution provided. The timelines that were introduced were as under:
(i)    41 returned candidates to file a statement within 15 days;
(ii)    Upon receipt of the above statements the ECP to give notice to the political party concerned;
(iii)    Then within 15 days the political party to submit its 'confirmation that the candidates contesting the General Elections as its candidates'; and
(iv)    The ECP within 7 days to issue and post on its website 'the list of candidates now MNAs'.
Judges may decide or dispose of a case as per their understanding of the Constitution and the law but it is critical that the case must be decided or disposed of. Permitting appropriate application to be filed by the ECP or the PTI meant that the case was not decided or disposed of. This coupled with the stated timelines effectively kept the appeals pending. In civil cases after a judgment is pronounced the decree follows. In constitutional cases too a judgment can be executed, provided it is finally and conclusively decided. The majority's short order and the majority's detailed judgment did not conclude the appeals. The well trodden legal path was abandoned by the majority which created unnecessary and avoidable problems. Since the appeals were not finally decided there was no decision which could be stated to be binding, in terms of Article 189 of the Constitution. Similarly, contempt of court proceedings for any non-compliance of the 'order of the Court', under Article 204 of the Constitution, cannot be initiated. The right of review, which Article 188 of the Constitution grants, was also effectively negated.
The majority's short order was announced on 12 July 2024, following which the Judges had to issue their detailed reasons for the same. Instead something inexplicable happened. A purported order/clarification was uploaded on the Supreme Court's website on 14 September 2024, and this was done without informing the Chief Justice, the other Judges (in the minority), and bypassing the Registrar and the office of the Supreme Court. And, this was done on a Saturday, after the Registrar had left. The majority's order/clarification of 14th September was admittedly passed without first listing the cases, without issuing notices to the parties and without issuance of the requisite notice to the Attorney-General for Pakistan. The title of the 'order' stated - 'In Chambers'. However, not all of the said eight Judges (in majority) were in the Supreme Court premises and some were not even in Islamabad (principal seat of the Supreme Court). By not issuing notices, not granting an opportunity of hearing, and not conducting the hearing in open Court, the well-established rules of natural justice were transgressed, and Article 10A of the Constitution, which gives protection to procedural fairness and has elevated due process and fair trial to the status of a Fundamental Right, was contravened. The mandatory requirements of openness and transparency were also transgressed.
The majority's order/clarification of 14th September was followed by yet another; the majority's clarification of 18th October which, like the earlier one of 14 September 2024, was uploaded on the website of the Supreme Court in similar manner. This was done on Friday, 18 October 2024 at 3.59 pm. This time too the cause list was not issued, parties were not informed, and an opportunity of hearing was not provided. Where and when the Judges (in majority) had met also remains a mystery. The majority's orders/clarifications of 14th September, 2024 and 18th October, 2024 cannot be stated to have been issued by a 'Court'; the forum which issued them was coram non judice. Moreover, such forum did not comply with the rudimentary principles of natural justice, of due process and of fair trial. Therefore, the same do not constitute legal orders, and are of no legal effect. They also cannot 
be categorized as a 'decision' of the Supreme Court (in terms of Article 189 of the Constitution), resultantly, they need not be followed or acted upon.
In Civil Appeals
For Appellants
(In both Appeals)
Faisal Siddiqui, Advocate Supreme Court,
assisted by Ammar Rafique, Advocate along with Ajmal Ghaffar Toor, Advocate 
Supreme Court, Haider Bin Masud, Advocate and Sahibzada M. Hamid Raza
(appellant in person)
For Respondent No. 1-ECP
(in both Appeals)
Sikandar Bashir Mohmand, Advocate Supreme Court
assisted by Abdullah Noor and Hamza Azmat, Advocates along with M. Arshad, D.G. (Law) ECP and Ms. Saima Tariq Janjua, D.D. Law (ECP)
For PPP
(In both Appeals)
Farooq H. Naek, Senior Advocate Supreme Court assisted by Asad Mehmood Abbasi, Advocate Supreme Court, Sheraz Shaukat Rajpar, Advocate and Syed Qaim Shah, Advocate.
For PML(N)
(In C.A. No. 333/24)
Haris Azmat, Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Ms. Faiza Asad, Advocate and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record.
For MQM Nemo.
For Respondent No.5
(in C.A. No. 333/2024)
M. Siddique Awan, Advocate Supreme Court.
For Respondent No. 9
(in C.A. No. 333/24)
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate Supreme Court/Advocate-on-Record.
For Respondent No. 11
(in C.A. No. 333/24)
Kamran Murtaza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court.
For Respondents Nos. 15 to 19, 21-22.
(In C.A. No. 333/24)
M. Makhdoom Ali Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court,
Sarmad Hani, Advocate Supreme Court, Saad Mumtaz Hashmi, Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Zarar Qadir Shoro, Advocate
along with Yawar Mukhtar, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 20
(In C.A. No. 333/24)
Zulfikar Khalid Maluka, Advocate Supreme Court.
For Respondent No. 9
(In C.A. No. 333/24)
M. Shahzad Shaukat, Advocate Supreme Court. assisted by Raza ur Rehman, Advocate.
In Civil Petitions
For the Petitioners
(In C.Ps. Nos. 1612-1514/24)
Asad Jan Durrani, Advocate Supreme Court. along with Malik Khawas, Assistant Law Officer, KPK Assembly
For the Petitioners
(In C.Ps. Nos. 1615-1617)
Shah Faisal Utmankhail, Advocate-General, KP.
Kausar Ali Shah, AAG, KPK and Zahid Yousaf, Advocate-on-Record.
For Respondent No. 1 (in C.Ps. Nos. 1612 and 1616/24)
Amir Javed, Advocate Supreme Court.
For R-6 (in C.P. 1612/24) and
For R-2 to 5 (in C.P. No. 1616/24)
Shah Khawar, Advocate Supreme Court.
For Respondents Nos. 1 to 6
(In C.Ps. Nos. 1613 and 1617/2024)
Kamran Murtaza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Qari Abdul Rasheed, Advocate Supreme Court.
For Respondents Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 8 (In C.P. No. 1614/24)
Imran Khan, Advocate Supreme Court.
In C.M.As.
For the Applicants:
(In C.M.As. 3554 and 5913/24)
Salman Akram Raja, Advocate Supreme Court, Sameer Khosa, Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Malik Ghulam Sabir,
Ramsa Banuri, Samreen Qureshi and Hamad Amin, Advocates.
On Court Notice:
For the Federation:
Mansoor Usman Awan, Attorney-General for Pakistan. (Assisted by: Ms. Maryam Ali Abbasi, Adv.) along with Malik Javed Iqbal Wains, AAGP.
Raja M. Shafqat Abbasi, D.A.G.
Ms. Maryam Rasheed, Advocate.
For Government of Punjab:
Khalid Ishaq, Advocate-General, Punjab and
Sanaullah Zahid, Additional Advocate-General, Punjab.
For Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa:
Shah Faisal Utmankhail, Advocate-General, KP and
Shah Faisal Ilyas, Additional Advocate-General, KP.
For Government of Sindh:
Miran Muhammad Shah, Addl. A.G., Sindh
(through video-link from Karachi) For Government of Balochistan:
Muhammad Asif Reki, Advocate-General, Balochistan. (Through video-link from Quetta) M. Ayaz Swati, Addl. A.G.
Tahir Iqbal Khattak, Additional Advocate-General, Balochistan. (At Islamabad) For ICT:
Muhammad Ayyaz Shaukat, A.G., Islamabad.
Research Assistance:
Umer A. Ranjha, Judicial Law Clerk.
Date of hearing: 9th July, 2024.
ORDER*
Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Munib Akhtar, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha A. Malik, Athar Minallah, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ.: For detailed reasons to be recorded later and subject to what is set out therein by way of amplification and/or explanation or otherwise, these appeals are decided in the following terms:
1.    The impugned judgment dated 25.03.2024 of the learned Full Bench of the High Court is set aside to the extent it is or may be inconsistent with this Order or the detailed reasons.
2.    The order of the Election Commission of Pakistan ("Commission") dated 01.03.2024 ("Impugned Order") is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution, without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
3.    The notifications (of various dates) whereby the persons respectively mentioned therein (being the persons identified in the Commission's notification No.F.5(1)/2024-Cord. dated 13.05.2024) have been declared to be returned candidates for reserved seats for women and minorities in the National and Provincial Assemblies are declared to be ultra vires the Constitution, without lawful authority and of no legal effect, and are quashed from 06.05.2024 onwards, being the date an interim order was made by the Court in CPLA Nos. 1328-9 of 2024, the leave petitions out of which the instant appeals arise.
4.    It is declared that the lack or denial of an election symbol does not in any manner affect the constitutional and legal rights of a political party to participate in an election (whether general or bye) and to field candidates and the Commission is under a constitutional duty to act, and construe and apply all statutory provisions, accordingly.
5.    It is declared that for the purposes, and within the meaning, of paragraphs (d) and (e) of clause (6) of Article 51 ("Article 51 Provisions") and paragraph (c) of clause (3) of Article 106 ("Article 106 Provisions") of the Constitution, the Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf ("PTI") was and is a political party, which secured or won (the two terms being interchangeable) general seats in the National and Provincial Assemblies in the General Elections of 2024 as herein after provided.
6.    During the course of the hearing of the instant appeals, on 27.06.2024, learned counsel for the Commission placed before the Court a list ("the List") of 80 returned candidates for the National Assembly (now MNAs), setting out in tabular form particulars relating to their election. Learned counsel made a categorical statement that the Commission stood by the data so provided to the Court. In particular, the List contained three columns marked as follows: (i) "Statement (on nomination form) given in declaration and oath by the person nominated (i.e., 'I belong to')"; (ii) "Certificate of party affiliation under Section 66 of the Elections Act, 2017"; and (iii) "Statutory Declaration/ affidavit accompanying section 66 certificate".
7.    In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the General Election of 2024, it is declared that out of the aforesaid 80 returned candidates (now MNAs) those (being 39 in all and whose particulars are set out in Annex A to this Order) in respect of whom the Commission has shown "PTI" in any one of the aforesaid columns in the List, were and are the returned candidates whose seats were and have been secured by the PTI within the meaning, and for purposes of, para 5 above in relation to the Article 51 Provisions.
8.    In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the General Election of 2024, it is further ordered that any of the remaining 41 returned candidates out of the aforesaid 80 (whose particulars are set out in Annex B to this Order) may, within 15 working days of this Order file a statement duly signed and notarized stating that he or she contested the General Election as a candidate of the political party specified therein. If any such statement(s) is/are filed, the Commission shall forthwith but in any case within 7 days thereafter give notice to the political party concerned to file, within 15 working days, a confirmation that the candidate contested the General Election as its candidate. A political party may in any case, at any time after the filing of a statement as aforesaid, of its own motion file its confirmation. If such a statement is filed, and is confirmed by the political party concerned, then the seat secured by such candidate shall be forthwith deemed to be a seat secured by that political party for the purposes of para 5 above in relation to the Article 51 Provisions. The Commission shall also forthwith issue, and post on its website, a list of the retuned candidates (now MNAs) and seats to which this para applies within 7 days after the last date on which a political party may file its confirmation and shall simultaneously file a compliance report in the Court.
9.    For the purposes of para 5 of this Order in relation to the Article 51 Provisions, the number of general seats secured by PTI shall be the total of the seats declared in terms of para 7 and those, if any, to which para 8 applies. The PTI shall be entitled to reserved seats for women and minorities in the National Assembly accordingly. PTI shall, within 15 working days of this Order file its lists of candidates for the said reserved seats and the provisions of the Elections Act, 2017 ("Act") (including in particular section 104) and the Elections Rules, 2017 ("Rules") shall be applied to such lists in such manner as gives effect to this Order in full measure. The Commission shall, out of the reserved seats for women and minorities in the National Assembly to which para 3 of this Order applies, notify as elected in terms of the Article 51 Provisions, that number of candidates from the lists filed (or, as the case may be, to be filed) by the PTI as is proportionate to the general seats secured by it in terms of paras 7 and 8 of this Order.
10.    The foregoing paras shall apply mutatis mutandis for purposes of the Article 106 Provisions in relation to PTI (as set out in para 5 herein above) for the reserved seats for women and minorities in the Khyber Pakhtunkwa, Punjab and Sindh Provincial Assemblies to which para 3 of this Order applies. In case the Commission or PTI need any clarification or order so as to give effect to this para in full measure, it shall forthwith apply to the Court by making an appropriate application, which shall be put up before the Judges constituting the majority in chambers for such orders and directions as may be deemed appropriate.
Sd/- Sd/Judge Judge
Sd/- Sd/Judge Judge
Sd/- Sd/Judge Judge
Sd/- Sd/Judge Judge
Islamabad, the
12th of July, 2024
Annexure-A
(Names of Candidates Affiliated with the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf as per the list verified from the data provided by ECP1)
Sr. No.    Number and Name of the Constituency    Name of the Candidate
1.    NA-2 (Swat-I)    Amjad Ali Khan
2.    NA-3 (Swat-II)    Saleem Rehman
3.    NA-4 (Swat-III)    Sohail Sultan
4.    NA-6 (Lower Dir-I)    Muhammad Bashir Khan
5.    NA-7 (Lower Dir-II)    Mehboob Shah
6.    NA-9 (Malakand)    Junaid Akbar
7.    NA-17 (Abbottabad-II)    Ali Khan Jadoon
8.    NA-19 (Swabi-I)    Asad Qaiser
9.    NA-20 (Swabi-II)    Shahram Khan
10.    NA-21 (Mardan-I)    Mujahid Ali
11.    NA-24 (Charsadda-I)    Anwar Taj
12.    NA-25 (Charsadda-II)    Fazal Muhammad Khan
13.    NA-29 (Peshawar-II)    Arbab Amir Ayub
14.    NA-30 (Peshawar-III)    Shandana Gulzar Khan
15.    NA-31 (Peshawar-IV)    Sher Ali Arbab
16.    NA-32 (Peshawar-V)    Asif Khan
17.    NA-33 (Nowshera-I)    Syed Shah Ahad Ali Shah
18.    NA-38 (Karak)    Shahid Ahmad
19.    NA-39 (Bannu)    Nasim Ali Shah
20.    NA-41 (Lakki Marwat)    Sher Afzal Khan
21.    NA-83 (Sargodha-II)    Usama Ahmed Mela
22.    NA-84 (Sargodha-III)    Shafqat Abbas
23.    NA-95 (Faisalabad-I)    Ali Afzal Sahi
24.    NA-96 (Faisalabad-II)    Rai Haider Ali Khan
25.    NA-100 (Faisalabad-VI)    Nisar Ahmed
26.    NA-101 (Faisalabad-VII)    Rana Atif
27.    NA-102 (Faisalabad-VIII)    Changaze Ahmad Khan
28.    NA-103 (Faisalabad-IX)    Muhammad Ali Sarfraz
29.    NA-115 (Sheikhupura-III)    Khurram Shahzad Virk
30.    NA-122 (Lahore-VI)    Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa
31.    NA-143 (Sahiwal-III)    Rai Hassan Nawaz Khan
32.    NA-149 (Multan-II)    Malik Muhammad Aamir Dogar
33.    NA-150 (Multan-III)    Makhdoom Zain Hussain Qureshi
34.    NA-154 (Lodhran-I)    Rana Muhammad Faraz Noon
35.    NA-171 (Rahim Yar Khan-III)    Mumtaz Mustafa
36.    NA-179 (Kot Addu-I)    Muhammad Shabbir Ali Qureshi
37.    NA-181 (Layyah-I)    Umber Majeed
38.    NA-182 (Layyah-II)    Awais Haider Jakhar
39.    NA-185 (D.G. Khan-II)    Zartaj Gul

Annexure-B
(Names of Independent Candidates)
Sr. No.    Number and Name of the Constituency    Name of the Candidate
1.    NA-1 (Chitral Upper-cum- Chitral Lower)    Abdul Latif
2.    NA-5 (Upper Dir)    Sahibzada Sibghatullah
3.    NA-13 (Battagram)    Muhammad Nawaz Khan
4.    NA-22 (Mardan-II)    Muhammad Atif
5.    NA-23 (Mardan-III)    Ali Muhammad
6.    NA-26 (Mohmand)    Sajid Khan
7.    NA-27 (Khyber)    Muhammad Iqbal Khan
8.    NA-34 (Nowshera-II)    Zulfiqar Ali
9.    NA-35 (Kohat)    Shehryar Afridi
10.    NA-36 (Hangu-cum-Orakzai)    Yousaf Khan
11.    NA-42 (South Waziristan Upper-cumSouth Waziristan Lower)    Zubair Khan
12.    NA-66 (Wazirabad)    Mohammad Ahmed Chattha
13.    NA-67 (Hafizabad)    Aniqa Mehdi
14.    NA-68 (Mandi Bahauddin-I)    Haji Imtiaz Ahmed Choudhry
15.    NA-78 (Gujranwala-II)    Muhammad Mobeen Arif
16.    NA-79 (Gujranwala-III)    Ihsan Ullah Virk
17.    NA-181 (Gujranwala-V)    Ch. Bilal Ejaz
18.    NA-86 (Sargodha-V)    Muhammad Miqdad Ali Khan
19.    NA-89 (Mianwali-I)    Muhammad Jamal Ahsan Khan
20.    NA-90 (Mianwali-II)    Umair Khan Niazi
21.    NA-91 (Bhakkar-I)    M. Sana Ullah Khan Mastikhel
22.    NA-93 (Chiniot-I)    Ghulam Muhammad
23.    NA-97 (Faisalabad-III)    Muhammad Saad Ullah
24.    NA-99 (Faisalabad-V)    Umar Farooq
25.    NA-105 (Toba Tek Singh-I)    Usama Hamza
26.    NA-107 (Toba Tek Singh-III)    Mohammad Riaz Khan
27.    NA-108 (Jhang-I)    Muhammad Mahbob Sultan
28.    NA-109 (Jhang-II)    Waqas Akram
29.    NA-110 (Jhang-III)    Muhammad Ameer Sultan
30.    NA-111 (Nankana Sahib-I)    Muhammad Arshad Sahi
31.    NA-116 (Sheikhupura-IV)    Khurram Munawar Manj
32.    NA-129 (Lahore-XIII)    Mian Muhammad Azhar
33.    NA-133 (Kasur-III)    Azim Uddin Zahid
34.    NA-137 (Okara-III)    Syed Raza Ali Gillani
35.    NA-156 (Vehari-I)    Ayesha Nazir
36.    NA-170 (Rahim Yar Khan-II)    Mian Ghous Muhammad
37.    NA-172 (Rahim Yar Khan-IV)    Javaid Iqbal
38.    NA-175 (Muzaffargarh-I)    Jamshaid Ahmad
39.    NA-177 (Muzaffargarh-III)    Muhammad Moazzam Ali Khan
40.    NA-180 (Kot Addu-II)    Fiaz Hussain
41.    NA-183 (Taunsa)    Khawaja Sheraz Mehmood
YAHYA AFRIDI, J.*---For reasons to be recorded later, Civil Appeals Nos. 333 and 334 of 2024, C.M.A. No. 2920 of 2024 in Civil Appeal No. 333 of 2024, Civil Petitions Nos. 1612, 1613, 1614, 1615, 1616 and 1617 of 2024 and C.M.A. No. 3554 of 2024 in C.P. Nil of 2024 are dismissed in terms that:
1.    Sunni Ittehad Council does not fulfil the conditions prescribed for a political party under the enabling provisions of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan ("Constitution") and the law to be allowed/allocated reserved seats for women and non-Muslims in the National Assembly or the Provincial Assemblies.
2.    Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf ("PTI") fulfils the conditions prescribed for a political party under the enabling provisions of the Constitution and the law to be allowed/allocated reserved seats for women and non-Muslims, in terms that:
i.    A candidate for a seat in the National Assembly or the Provincial Assembly, whoin his/her nomination paper has declared on oath to belong to PTI and duly submitted a certificate of the same political party confirming that he/she is the nominated candidate of PTI for the respective constituency, shall remain so, and cannot be declared independent, unless he/she submitted a written declaration to the Election Commission of Pakistan or Returning Officer to be treated as the candidate of another political party or as an independent candidate;
ii.    A returned candidate to the National Assembly or the Provincial Assembly,who in his/her nomination paper has declared on oath to belong to PTI and duly submitted a certificate of the same political party confirming that he/she is the nominated candidate of PTI for the respective constituency, shall remain so, and this consistent position maintained by a returned candidate throughout the electoral process should be legally recognized by the Election Commission of Pakistan and such returned candidate cannot be treated as the returned candidate of another political party or as an independent returned candidate, and thus, the reserved seats for women and non-Muslims are to be allowed/ allocated to PTI, accordingly;
iii.    A candidate nominated by PTI for a constituency of the National Assembly orthe Provincial Assembly who, after being declared returned, joined another political party or sought to be treated as independent, raises serious concerns about disregarding the trust reposed in him/her by the voters, thus undermining the will of the people; and
iv.    The legal implications, effects and consequences of the determinations made above in paragraphs 2(ii) and 2(iii), as well as the actions or inactions of the Election Commission of Pakistan thereon, although deeply concerning, have not been challenged in the present appeals and petitions; and the persons who would be affected or aggrieved are not parties before this Court. Therefore, issuing definitive directions to the Election Commission of Pakistan qua the allocation of specific number of reserved seats for women and non-Muslims to a political party in the National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies would not be legally appropriate.
3. Accordingly, the Election Commission of Pakistan is directed to decide the allocation of reserved seats for women and non-Muslims to political parties in the
National Assembly and the Provincial Assemblies in the light of the determinations made hereinabove after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, and if required revisit its earlier decisions on the matter. The needful be done within seven days of the receipt of this order.
Sd/Judge Islamabad
Arif
12th July, 2024.
Order* in
Civil Appeal No.333/2024, Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 2920/ 2024 in Civil Appeal No.333/2024, Civil Appeal No.334/ 2024, Civil Petitions Nos. 1612 to 1617/2024 and Civil Miscellaneous Application No.3554/2024 in Civil Petition Nil/ 2024.
Sunni Ittehad Council through its Chairman,
Faisalabad and others Appellants/Petitioners
Versus
Election Commission of Pakistan through its
Secretary, Islamabad and others Respondents
-------------
Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan
For reasons to be recorded later, we dismiss the appeals, petition as well as CMAs and the judgment of the Peshawar High Court is upheld.
Sd/- Sd/-
Judge Judge
Islamabad: 12th July, 2024.
Order of the Court
By a majority of 8 (comprising Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Munib Akhtar, Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Ayesha A. Malik, Athar Minallah, Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Shahid Waheed and Irfan Saadat Khan, JJ) the instant appeals are decided in 
terms of the short order of the majority of even date (and the other petitions including leave petitions and C.M.As are decided accordingly).
I agree with the short order authored by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail.
Justice Qazi Faez Isa, CJ.
Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, J. Justice Munib Akhtar, J.
With utmost respect I differ. My short order is appended herewith.
Justice Yahya Afridi, J.
I have attached my separate short order dismissing all the appeals, petitions and applications and uphold the impugned judgment of the Peshawar H.C.
Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, J.
I have appended my separate order.
Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, J.
Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, J.
Justice Ayesha A. Malik, J.
Justice Athar Minallah, J.
Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, J.
Justice Shahid Waheed, J.
Justice Irfan Saadat Khan, J.
I agree with the short order passed by J. Amin-ud-Din Khan.
Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan, J.
Announced.
Islamabad,
12 July, 2024.
Approved for reporting.

ORDER

 For reasons to be recorded later, we dispose of these appeals, petitions and miscellaneous applications through a short order as under: